I fully agree, however: I don't think the original poster meant to imply that the students drive the research more than the professors, only to say that the salaries shouldn't be cut. ($8.75 is not much -- I make more than that as a teaching assistant/grader). Students involved in research are bright and innovative, and to refer to them as "just kids" is what offended me.
I'm a junior at Washington University in St. Louis. (No, it's not in any of the places you'd expect a university of that name to exist in...) I tried to look up the exact statistics, but couldn't find them. I do know that they like to tell incoming freshmen what an unusual number of research opportunities there are (although the number may be more 'unusual' within the engineering school than in the school as a whole). If you want to do research, it's as easy as walking up to a professor and asking him/her. You can pretty much always get class credit, and you can usually get paid (although not both... wouldn't that be nice...:) ).
This attitude irks me to no end. I am in college right now; one of my biggest reasons for choosing the one I did was the distinct lack of this damaging attitude. My university has one of the highest percentages of undergrads involved in research. Even freshmen! No one is excluded simply because they are "just a kid". In the (paraphrased) words of one professor here: "This university contains some of the brightest minds in the country! Why in the world wouldn't we want students involved in research?"
AFAIK, *no* program designed to play Go has come anywhere close to beating a human that is remotely good at the game. Show me a successful Go AI, and then I'll be impressed.:)
The moral issue is the tone of the article--the obvious belief of the writer that families have been injured by having their children.
I agree with your sentiment. However, I do not interpret the tone of the article in the same way that you are. When the article states that the hospital is sorry for what happened, I don't agree with your interpretation as "We're sorry you had to have a baby with Down's Syndrome." If that were the case, it would indeed be a depressing article.
My interpretation: (reread the article so you can see where I get this). Regardless of a woman's stance regarding abortion in these situations, it is always going to be traumatizing to discover that your child may have Down's Syndrome. The point of the article, and the reason the hospital extends its apologies is that many women were told that there was no risk. Later, the verdict was changed. They were told that there is a significant chance of their baby having Down's. This gives them much less time to prepare mentally for whatever alternative they might choose. Worse yet, it is now so late in the pregnancy that the absolute test for the syndrome puts both mother and baby at risk!
These women deserved the apology they got, with no moral reproof towards the hospital or journalist.
I guess you are counting only high school students with your estimate of 50 hrs a week. I'm in college. I spend 15-20 hrs a week in class (for 5 classes). Each class expects you to spend about 10 hrs a week studying. I have a job for about 10 hrs a week. Yeah, that's about 80 hrs right there, only 10 of them for pay. Have fun while you can, boy. There's no free time once you get to college.
-- A disillusioned student, anxious for the semester to be over
Silly! No one watches the Superbowl commercials with the intent of actually going out and buying any of these products! It's just that the Superbowl is traditionally a showcase for the most clever and amusing commercials of the year.
Not only do several far-flung religions have a similar story about a flood, there actually is REAL scientific evidence supporting this possibility. I wish I had some links, but unfortunately I don't. This is not to say that every word in the Bible regarding the flood is necessarily true, ie Noah built the ark and every thing that wasn't on it died. The point is, there very likely *was* a widespread flood during biblical times, and even if the story of it was exaggerated in the telling, it shows that there *are* things in the Bible that are based on true occurences. This is not to say that everyone should jump up and believe everything in the Bible immediately. However, you shouldn't sarcastically ask for scientific proof unless you've checked to see if there is any first.
Slashdot Mirror
I fully agree, however: I don't think the original poster meant to imply that the students drive the research more than the professors, only to say that the salaries shouldn't be cut. ($8.75 is not much -- I make more than that as a teaching assistant/grader). Students involved in research are bright and innovative, and to refer to them as "just kids" is what offended me.
I'm a junior at Washington University in St. Louis. (No, it's not in any of the places you'd expect a university of that name to exist in...) I tried to look up the exact statistics, but couldn't find them. I do know that they like to tell incoming freshmen what an unusual number of research opportunities there are (although the number may be more 'unusual' within the engineering school than in the school as a whole). If you want to do research, it's as easy as walking up to a professor and asking him/her. You can pretty much always get class credit, and you can usually get paid (although not both... wouldn't that be nice... :) ).
This attitude irks me to no end. I am in college right now; one of my biggest reasons for choosing the one I did was the distinct lack of this damaging attitude. My university has one of the highest percentages of undergrads involved in research. Even freshmen! No one is excluded simply because they are "just a kid". In the (paraphrased) words of one professor here: "This university contains some of the brightest minds in the country! Why in the world wouldn't we want students involved in research?"
AFAIK, *no* program designed to play Go has come anywhere close to beating a human that is remotely good at the game. Show me a successful Go AI, and then I'll be impressed. :)
oooOOOOOoooo, you're sooo smart. I bow before your knowledge.
It was a lot funnier before you stuck your "Informative" nose in here and explained the joke to everyone.
*sigh*
Globalization is spreading all over the world.
Wow. Is it really??
Bob's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe, You Idiots
The moral issue is the tone of the article--the obvious belief of the writer that families have been injured by having their children.
I agree with your sentiment. However, I do not interpret the tone of the article in the same way that you are. When the article states that the hospital is sorry for what happened, I don't agree with your interpretation as "We're sorry you had to have a baby with Down's Syndrome." If that were the case, it would indeed be a depressing article.
My interpretation: (reread the article so you can see where I get this). Regardless of a woman's stance regarding abortion in these situations, it is always going to be traumatizing to discover that your child may have Down's Syndrome. The point of the article, and the reason the hospital extends its apologies is that many women were told that there was no risk. Later, the verdict was changed. They were told that there is a significant chance of their baby having Down's. This gives them much less time to prepare mentally for whatever alternative they might choose. Worse yet, it is now so late in the pregnancy that the absolute test for the syndrome puts both mother and baby at risk!
These women deserved the apology they got, with no moral reproof towards the hospital or journalist.
Hear, hear! THEY ARE NOT ALIENS!!! sheesh people. no wonder no one likes the ending if all thought they were aliens.
I guess you are counting only high school students with your estimate of 50 hrs a week. I'm in college. I spend 15-20 hrs a week in class (for 5 classes). Each class expects you to spend about 10 hrs a week studying. I have a job for about 10 hrs a week. Yeah, that's about 80 hrs right there, only 10 of them for pay. Have fun while you can, boy. There's no free time once you get to college.
-- A disillusioned student, anxious for the semester to be over
Silly! No one watches the Superbowl commercials with the intent of actually going out and buying any of these products! It's just that the Superbowl is traditionally a showcase for the most clever and amusing commercials of the year.
Do not click above link. Trust me on this one.
You have missed something else -- "improving" referred to the amnesia, not the tetris-playing.
This program does not resize correctly on my machine. Know of anything else that's similar?
Not only do several far-flung religions have a similar story about a flood, there actually is REAL scientific evidence supporting this possibility. I wish I had some links, but unfortunately I don't. This is not to say that every word in the Bible regarding the flood is necessarily true, ie Noah built the ark and every thing that wasn't on it died. The point is, there very likely *was* a widespread flood during biblical times, and even if the story of it was exaggerated in the telling, it shows that there *are* things in the Bible that are based on true occurences. This is not to say that everyone should jump up and believe everything in the Bible immediately. However, you shouldn't sarcastically ask for scientific proof unless you've checked to see if there is any first.